Followers of the opioid crisis know that nothing much makes sense. And if you follow Proposition 65 madness in California, you know that doesn't add up either. So if you're in the mood for something that puts the Crazyometer® needle in the red, here it is. You will not be disappointed.
Proposition 65, which began its miserable life as The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, now has little to do with safe water or safe anything else. It's a bad joke to scientists, a plague on California businesses, and a goldmine to attorneys. Coffee went onto the list and now it's off. Why? Good question.
Like a broken clock that accidentally gets the time right, California has finally stumbled upon the correct approach to coffee. Sort of. After widespread mockery and condemnation, the Golden State has had an epiphany: Maybe coffee doesn't cause cancer. The FDA agrees.
Baby powder causes cancer in California but not in South Carolina. That makes sense, right? Because as everybody knows, when you cross into the Golden State your risk of cancer immediately quadruples.
A California judge is going to determine whether or not coffee causes cancer. Think about that. We live in a society where judges and lawyers – not medical doctors or scientists – get to determine the credibility of biomedical research. And guess who paid in the process?
NYTimes discusses the shady industry of herbal supplements, Caliofrnia's Prop. 65 targets e-cigs for their nicotine, and more support for BPA comes from the European Food Safety Authority
Activists are attacking Starbucks because its coffee like everyone else s coffee contains acrylamide. This is not because the company actually adds the chemical to its coffee, nor does anyone else it is formed naturally when the beans are roasted.
Diisononyl Phthalate (DINP) was added to California's ever-growing Proposition 65 list of known carcinogens late last year. However, Elissa Sterry, VP for ExxonMobil s Intermediates
Phthalates, a group of ubiquitous chemicals that are perennial darlings of the anti-chemical movement, have been accused of being responsible for just about everything from birth defects to the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand. Well, now they may be going onto California s chemical wastebasket called Proposition 65, ostensibly a list of chemicals that cause cancer or reproductive toxicity.
A weekend retail therapy session turned into an ACSH topic when Director of Video Production Ana Simovska came across a California-made wallet with a Proposition 65 warning. Dr. Josh Bloom debunks the junk in the above video.
In the culmination of a five-week trial, California s Judge Brick ruled that health warnings would not be necessary on various fruit and vegetable products, 100% juices and baby foods, from companies including Del Monte, Dole, Gerber, Hain-Ãelestial, J.M. Smucker, Seneca Foods and Welch s.
Burning fireplace or wood stove fuels such as natural firewood results in emission of carbon monoxide, soot, and other combustion by-products which are known by the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects, or reproductive harm. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY